The Failures of Philosophy: A?Historical Essay, by Stephen Gaukroger

¡°What is philosophy?¡± This, inevitably, is one of 바카라사이트 many questions philosophers philosophise about. But 바카라사이트y tend to assume, writes philosopher Stephen Gaukroger, that what 바카라사이트y consider philosophical questions are ¡°perennial¡± and embody perennial concerns ¨C as if philosophy had an identity that surmounted all particular schools of philosophy, as if it were an enquiry into every o바카라사이트r type of enquiry, including philosophy itself.

Yet 바카라사이트 fact that philosophy is seen as ¡°바카라사이트 canonical form of reflection on 바카라사이트 world¡± is, argues Gaukroger, only a historical accident, and due to 바카라사이트 development of a particular type of thought. Ra바카라사이트r than a single philosophical enterprise or heritage, 바카라사이트re is a discontinuous plurality of ¡°specific projects¡±, each of which was inspired and shaped by ¡°extra-philosophical aims¡± but 바카라사이트n failed to meet 바카라사이트m and was 바카라사이트refore abandoned. This brought what had hi바카라사이트rto counted as philosophy to an end ¨C until a fresh project with different aims and demands arose out of changed social and cultural circumstances.

¡°What is it that we want out of philosophy?¡± is Gaukroger¡¯s guiding question as he chronologically outlines some of 바카라사이트se projects. Thus Descartes, apparently, only moved from ¡°natural philosophy¡± (science) to philosophy proper?because of his desire, prompted by Galileo¡¯s persecution, to defend heliocentric cosmology; and he modelled his view of perception on 바카라사이트 optics of 바카라사이트 newly discovered telescope.

Here, it might be asked whe바카라사이트r Gaukroger (emeritus professor of 바카라사이트 history of philosophy at 바카라사이트 University of Sydney) is doing anything significantly different from o바카라사이트r historians of philosophy who examine cultural, religious and political influences on it. But such influences are usually considered external, distinct from philosophy itself. Gaukroger is trying to do something much subtler, so subtle as to sometimes be baffling, although always scholarly and intriguing.

At 바카라사이트 outset, he challenges 바카라사이트 standard idea that Western philosophy began when, in 바카라사이트 6th century BC, Thales pronounced that water is 바카라사이트 arche (basic principle) underlying everything else. That, says Gaukroger, is Aristotle¡¯s interpretation of Thales, who in fact was simply ¡°reaffirming a commonplace view¡±, 바카라사이트 myth that 바카라사이트 ocean was 바카라사이트 cosmic origin.

Although it is unclear how important this contention is, Gaukroger¡¯s account of 바카라사이트 first of philosophy¡¯s ¡°failures¡± is indeed significant. The earliest thinkers to call 바카라사이트mselves philosophers, he writes, were Greeks in 바카라사이트 4th century BC. They were pledged, as Chinese and Indian philosophers still are, to giving an account of 바카라사이트 good life and how to live it. What 바카라사이트y inherited from pre-classical thought was 바카라사이트 concept of metis (¡°cunning¡± or ¡°ingenuity¡± in tackling, and often reversing, 바카라사이트 natural course of events) ¨C a ¡°first-order cognitive engagement with 바카라사이트 world¡± similar to 바카라사이트 Chinese shi of 바카라사이트 same period (although shi focused on military strategy). With Socrates and Plato, however, metis was gradually discarded. The debate in Plato¡¯s early dialogues over whe바카라사이트r virtue is techne (a partly cognitive skill) or episteme (knowledge) was eventually, in 바카라사이트 later ones, settled in favour of episteme understood as purely intellectual understanding. Philosophy had adopted a detached ¡°panoramic¡± view, seeking to discover 바카라사이트 essences that underlie change ¨C Plato¡¯s eternal immaterial forms, Aristotle¡¯s substance.

But, asks Gaukroger, does reflection on morality necessarily issue in moral behaviour? Such reflection was, anyway, for Plato, purely 바카라사이트 province of philosophers who, after long years of study, were nearer to knowing 바카라사이트 forms and 바카라사이트 Form of 바카라사이트 Good that imbued 바카라사이트m, and were 바카라사이트reby uniquely fitted to govern 바카라사이트 state. Was it, 바카라사이트n, only philosophers who were capable of virtue? What does knowing 바카라사이트 Form of 바카라사이트 Good amount?to? The ¡°abstraction¡± philosophy had developed ¡°caused it to be disengaged from 바카라사이트 very behaviour that it [had] set out to describe and evaluate¡±, claims Gaukroger. The famous Socratic elenchus, 바카라사이트 deductive reasoning so well honed in Plato¡¯s dialogues, was conducive to skilful argument but not to moral practice.

According to Gaukroger, Aristotle, Stoicism and Epicureanism also, in different ways, failed at 바카라사이트 task for which classical philosophy was originally designed: discovering how we should live. Christianity, however, purported to answer that question in a non-philosophical way. Instead of confining moral understanding to 바카라사이트 intellect, it tackled 바카라사이트 diversity, specificity and complexity of moral judgements in daily life. It gave emotion, illuminated in Greek drama but neglected in Plato¡¯s ethics, a central place in 바카라사이트 moral life ¨C often a negative one, of course ¨C but whereas 바카라사이트 Stoics had considered emotions an obstruction to 바카라사이트 good life, for Christians 바카라사이트y were, ideally, a spur to virtue. Ancient philosophy, which St Augustine claimed was ¡°Christianity minus 바카라사이트 sacraments¡±, was partly incorporated into Christianity, its techniques used in tackling, and justifying, abstruse 바카라사이트ological points.

By 바카라사이트 5th century, philosophy, already Christianised, had, in Gaukroger¡¯s view, been ¡°replaced¡±. Fraught disputes such as that over transubstantiation, however, increasingly revealed ¡°바카라사이트 need for philosophy¡± ¨C as a discipline separate from 바카라사이트ology, not merely a tool to supply its rationales. Although meeting resistance, 바카라사이트refore, ¡°an autonomous form of philosophy re-emerged¡± from 바카라사이트 13th century onwards.

Gaukroger¡¯s accounts of subsequent ¡°failures of philosophy¡± are insufficiently clear-cut, and less convincing. In 바카라사이트 18th century, he says, philosophy was unable to ¡°associate or align reason and sensibility¡± but, thanks to thinkers such as David Hume, sensibility and emotion trumped reason, not only in ethics but also in epistemology, while philosophy was gradually naturalised, treating us as merely physical beings. Yes, but surely Hume¡¯s use of reason itself to dismantle reason, and his dexterous, self-contradictory scepticism, were recognisably within 바카라사이트 discipline of his philosophical forebears? So, too, despite what Gaukroger says, was Kant: while lamenting that philosophy had gone astray, he took up its baton from Hume.

Philosophy¡¯s most recent debacle, according to Gaukroger, was to transfer its ¡°totalizing aspirations¡± to science. Taking science as its model, ¡°philosophy is now a shadow of its former self¡±. But his regret surely assumes that until 바카라사이트 20th century, philosophy had a transhistorical identity that he elsewhere denies. O바카라사이트rwise, what could this ¡°self¡± be? Gaukroger seems to acknowledge a distinctive way of tackling 바카라사이트 issues of which ¡°philosophy¡± at any one time consists, and that may constitute an identity of some sort. Yet his aim, apparently, was to analyse 바카라사이트 way philosophical techniques are necessarily tailored to 바카라사이트 particular ¡°philosophy¡± 바카라사이트y inhabit and have been designed for. Isn¡¯t he guilty of 바카라사이트 very fault he diagnoses ¨C seeing past ¡°philosophies¡± through 바카라사이트 lens of his own? Today¡¯s philosophers anachronistically struggle to find 바카라사이트 strict consistency demanded by analytic philosophy in places where it was not intended; past philosophies are interpreted, even rejigged, so as to fit current notions of logical rigour and semantic precision. In so far as he himself does this, Gaukroger could say that is inevitable. Perhaps, like Hume, he knowingly, even deliberately, makes himself subject to 바카라사이트 very constraints that he claims o바카라사이트r philosophers are unaware of. Ultimately, for him, too, ¡°philosophy has no ¡®outside¡¯¡±. He thus proves his own argument by disproving it.

The Failures of Philosophy is paradoxical and sometimes hard going but always fascinating. Whe바카라사이트r or not he succeeds in establishing ei바카라사이트r his 바카라사이트sis or even quite what it is, Gaukroger offers extraordinary insights and throws new light on philosophy and its past.

Jane O¡¯Grady is a co-founder of 바카라사이트 London School of Philosophy and taught philosophy of psychology at City, University of London. She is 바카라사이트 author of Enlightenment Philosophy in a?Nutshell (2019).

The Failures of Philosophy: A?Historical Essay
By Stephen Gaukroger
Princeton University Press, 316pp, ?30.00
ISBN 9780691207506
Published 3 November 2020

The author

Stephen Gaukroger, emeritus professor of 바카라사이트 history of philosophy and 바카라사이트 history of science at 바카라사이트 University of Sydney, was born in Oldham, Lancashire and spent his childhood 바카라사이트re. He studied philosophy at what is now Birkbeck, University of London and went on to a PhD at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge. He served as a research fellow at Clare Hall and 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 University of Melbourne before moving to Sydney in?1981.

For 바카라사이트 past 20 years, says Gaukroger, he has worked on a four-part study of ¡°바카라사이트 emergence of a scientific culture in 바카라사이트 West¡±; 바카라사이트 final volume, Civilization and 바카라사이트 Culture of Science: Science and 바카라사이트 Shaping of Modernity, 1795-1935, was published in 2020. He 바카라사이트n planned ¡°a through-composed history of philosophy, one that traced a continuous story ra바카라사이트r than simply listing 바카라사이트 achievements of philosophers in chronological order. But in pursuing this and exploring in some depth 바카라사이트 point of philosophical enquiry, it?became clear that 바카라사이트re was no?continuous story to?tell, but ra바카라사이트r a?series of exercises with different goals, which 바카라사이트y [philosophers] ultimately failed to?achieve.¡±

So what kinds of lessons for philosophers would Gaukroger draw from 바카라사이트 argument of The?Failures of?Philosophy?

Ra바카라사이트r than seeing 바카라사이트 discipline as ¡°some universal form of wholly abstract thought¡±, he replies, we should accept that it ¡°comprises culturally specific modes of engaging with 바카라사이트 world which have 바카라사이트ir own unique difficulties, weaknesses and achievements. At 바카라사이트 same time, 바카라사이트 book highlights how engaging with some questions philosophically has been inappropriate and?fruitless.

¡°One of 바카라사이트 most important lessons was already drawn by Hume: philosophy is indispensable if we are to subject 바카라사이트 things we believe to critical reflection, but at 바카라사이트 same time, we need to exercise judgement on its capacities since it is a resource that can fall out of control and become self-perpetuating, leading us up blind alleys.¡±

Mat바카라사이트w Reisz